4 ms·

Two objections 1. The cholas did not force their language or culture or religion, these were already Hindu regions, with extensive trade with India. Some were

Two objections 1. The cholas did not force their language or culture or religion, these were already Hindu regions, with extensive trade with India. Some were allies and others rivals. This is simply not even comparable to colonization. They went to war over trade and reinstated the local heirs as kings. 2. The fact that you call the chollas cruel while you take offense to Islamic invaders who clearly destroyed 100s of thousands of temples and massacred millions of Hindus. This continues in modern times, in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Proves the point you are colonised. Inspite of all the modern education the world still sees recruitment into Al queda, ISIS or Taliban. It takes a heart of stone to defend the Islamic tyrants of the past.

teleforce 5y ago
Sorry to hit your nerve by mentioning 'cruel' Chola dynasty that you're compelled to reply to my same comments twice. To be honest only 'cruel' dynasty that can attacked, killed and plundered their fellow Hindu kingdoms just to install their own puppets. I'm not sure you really understand the meaning of "colonization" that you're frequently using and dissing it [1],[2]. The British is world renowned colonizer and they performed the classic form of colonization by utilizing "divide and conquer" technique over foreign lands. Using this technique the obedient local and native rulers are maintained but the disobedient will be killed or outcast, and replaced by the new obedient rulers. These colonized kings and rulers were under complete influent of the colonizer and generally called the puppets. This is exactly what the Chola dynasty did to their fellow South East Asian neighbours unlike the Mysore or the Mughal dynasty. There is no record that the latter perform any excursion to the South East Asian neighbours apart from the peaceful trade. Please bear in mind that all of them occupied the same land albeit at different times. The 'cruel' Chola dysnasty is the classic colonizer and perhaps the British learnt their colonization technique from Chola because their modus operandi are very similar. I'm still waiting for your credible massacres and genocides references especially performed by Tipu Sultan. [1]https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/colonizer https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/eng... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization
- naruvimama 5y ago
  "This often involves the settlers dispossessing indigenous inhabitants, or instituting legal and other structures which systematically disadvantage them" The Cholas did not do any of these. They only wanted to stop piracy and extortion which was making trade more risky. This was overall helpful to the economy of the whole region. The Mughals imposed Jizya, imposed language, paid tributes to Afganistan. This was done as late as with Aurangazeb. The Mopalla Hindu massacre was a continuation of Tipu's demographic change, forced conversion and raids on Hindus of the coorg in particular which went on for a period of more than 100 years by then.
  - teleforce 5y ago
    Yes sure, they want to stop piracy and extortion to guarantee their trade activities. Exactly the same classic reasons given by the Dutch and British East India company to their respective government to intervene and colonize any strategic foreign land! It seems you have cherry picked the definition that best suited your own skewed agenda. Please check the main definition from the dictionary (and also other parts of the Wikipedia), "a person who helps take control of an area or a country that is not their own, especially using force, and sends people from their own country to live there". Please check your history, Chola dynasty did sent their own people to these conquered foreign places and some of Chola descendents continued to rule several parts of South East Asian countries. Mysore and Mughal dynasty are both from India subcontinent and according to some reputable historians that includes Afghanistan. Yes their ancestors are perhaps from somewhere else similar to Chola ruling class or upper caste who ancestors most probably from Aryan descendents originated from northern regions [1]. It just like saying now that cosmopolitan American including Irish, Chinese, Jewish, Scandinavian are all the US colonizer because their ancestors are from somewhere else eventhough they have lived there several generations for hundreds of years. Genuinely asking you for a third time any reliable source of references regarding massacre done by Tipu Sultan, if not it's just hearsay and evil slander to systematically tarnish this Indian hero of independence, and shame on you. [1]Tiruvalangadu Inscription States That Cholas Are Descendants of Aryan King Bharata: https://www.indictales.com/2019/02/20/tiruvalangadu-inscription-states-that-cholas-are-descendants-of-aryan-king-bharata https://www.indictales.com/2019/02/20/tiruvalangadu-inscript...

teleforce 5y ago

Sorry to hit your nerve by mentioning 'cruel' Chola dynasty that you're compelled to reply to my same comments twice. To be honest only 'cruel' dynasty that can attacked, killed and plundered their fellow Hindu kingdoms just to install their own puppets. I'm not sure you really understand the meaning of "colonization" that you're frequently using and dissing it [1],[2]. The British is world renowned colonizer and they performed the classic form of colonization by utilizing "divide and conquer" technique over foreign lands. Using this technique the obedient local and native rulers are maintained but the disobedient will be killed or outcast, and replaced by the new obedient rulers. These colonized kings and rulers were under complete influent of the colonizer and generally called the puppets. This is exactly what the Chola dynasty did to their fellow South East Asian neighbours unlike the Mysore or the Mughal dynasty. There is no record that the latter perform any excursion to the South East Asian neighbours apart from the peaceful trade. Please bear in mind that all of them occupied the same land albeit at different times. The 'cruel' Chola dysnasty is the classic colonizer and perhaps the British learnt their colonization technique from Chola because their modus operandi are very similar. I'm still waiting for your credible massacres and genocides references especially performed by Tipu Sultan. [1]https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/colonizer https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/eng... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization

naruvimama 5y ago
"This often involves the settlers dispossessing indigenous inhabitants, or instituting legal and other structures which systematically disadvantage them" The Cholas did not do any of these. They only wanted to stop piracy and extortion which was making trade more risky. This was overall helpful to the economy of the whole region. The Mughals imposed Jizya, imposed language, paid tributes to Afganistan. This was done as late as with Aurangazeb. The Mopalla Hindu massacre was a continuation of Tipu's demographic change, forced conversion and raids on Hindus of the coorg in particular which went on for a period of more than 100 years by then.
- teleforce 5y ago
  Yes sure, they want to stop piracy and extortion to guarantee their trade activities. Exactly the same classic reasons given by the Dutch and British East India company to their respective government to intervene and colonize any strategic foreign land! It seems you have cherry picked the definition that best suited your own skewed agenda. Please check the main definition from the dictionary (and also other parts of the Wikipedia), "a person who helps take control of an area or a country that is not their own, especially using force, and sends people from their own country to live there". Please check your history, Chola dynasty did sent their own people to these conquered foreign places and some of Chola descendents continued to rule several parts of South East Asian countries. Mysore and Mughal dynasty are both from India subcontinent and according to some reputable historians that includes Afghanistan. Yes their ancestors are perhaps from somewhere else similar to Chola ruling class or upper caste who ancestors most probably from Aryan descendents originated from northern regions [1]. It just like saying now that cosmopolitan American including Irish, Chinese, Jewish, Scandinavian are all the US colonizer because their ancestors are from somewhere else eventhough they have lived there several generations for hundreds of years. Genuinely asking you for a third time any reliable source of references regarding massacre done by Tipu Sultan, if not it's just hearsay and evil slander to systematically tarnish this Indian hero of independence, and shame on you. [1]Tiruvalangadu Inscription States That Cholas Are Descendants of Aryan King Bharata: https://www.indictales.com/2019/02/20/tiruvalangadu-inscription-states-that-cholas-are-descendants-of-aryan-king-bharata https://www.indictales.com/2019/02/20/tiruvalangadu-inscript...